Joint
Custody Just Does Not Work.Research from
the California Judicial Council, 2000. Look at the findings; ignore the
"spin." This study was done ostensibly to look at the results
of mediated "parenting plans."

Look what happened
to joint custody.
As a lifestyle, it just does not work. Its only arguable accomplishment
probably is to ultimately send more children into the sole custody of their
fathers than otherwise would occur. (A primary reason fathers' rights groups
push for it.)

However, it's unlikely
that any group, children, mothers, or fathers, benefits from this phenomenon
-- other than, of course, custody mediators, evaluators, and parenting
coordinators, who make more money the more problematic and unworkable a
"parenting plan" is. See "The
Agenda Behind the Rhetoric." Most fathers who weren't the primary
parents during their marriages eventually (if not immediately) palm off
the primary parenting onto stepmothers
and others. And in the long run, while it saves on paying child support
(a psychic reward for the bread-winning father), it rarely costs less to
have custody of a child than to pay child support. Mothers who initially
were stay-home parents or merely their children's primary caregivers, and/or
the dependent spouse, suffer long-term detriment, both economic
and emotional. Most of all, the children themselves, who most likely did
not need this in order to have a "relationship" with their fathers,
just don't do well from repeated changes in household/family composition,
and from the lack of stability.

A citizen's right
to interstate travel has long been recognized as a fundamental right, grounded
upon the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2, of
the United States Constitution. Edwards v. People of State of California,
314 U.S. 160, 173, 62 S.Ct. 164 (1941).

This principle encompasses
the right of individuals to "migrate, resettle, find a new job, and
start a new life." Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 629,
89 S.Ct 1322, 1329, 22 L.Ed.2d 600 (1969).

Edwards,
Shapiro, and their progeny were concerned with the constitutionality
of state statutes designed to discourage indigent people from relocating
to their state of choice. The Supreme Court
consistently held the statutes to be unconstitutional, reasoning:

"...[t]he
nature of our Federal Union and our constitutional concepts of personal
liberty unite to require that all citizens be free to travel throughout
the length and breadth of our land, uninhibited by statutes, rules, or
regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict this movement."

The Court also held
that the right of travel is "...a virtually unconditional personal
right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." Id. at 643,
89 S.Ct. at 1336. For the same reasons
that a state cannot prohibit a person from moving to a particular area,
it also cannot prohibit a person from moving from a particular area.

Under strict
scrutiny, the state must show that it has a compelling purpose for
denying the fundamental right and that the remedy chosen is narrowly
tailored to meet the stated purpose.
Shapiro, 394 U.S. at 634, 89 S.Ct. at 1331.

Requiring a citizen
to live in a specific locale, thereby restricting his or her fundamental
right of travel, must be based on compelling state concerns. Hodgson
v. Minnesota, 497 U.S. 417 (1990).

Parents also have
a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of
their natural children, and due process must be provided when the state
interferes with that relationship. Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.
745 (1982).

Index:
Reading Room
This is a collection of on-site and great offsite links reading for pleasure
and education, including complete on-line works of fiction and nonfiction.
Send recommendations for additional listings to sarah@argate.net. Also
see: the inspirational:

Index:
Research Rooms
Links page. General reference materials such as calculators, calendars,
measures, dictionaries, translators, directories, and similar material;
quick links to legal research websites. To be on this page, it has to be
outstanding. Send suggestions to sarah@argate.net.

WOMEN'S HISTORY; WOMEN'S
RIGHTS

"...He has so framed
the laws of divorce, as to what shall be the proper causes, and in case
of separation, to whom the guardianship of the children shall be given,
as to be wholly regardless of the happiness of women -- the law, in all
cases, going upon a false supposition of the supremacy of man and giving
all power into his hands." -- Declaration of Sentiments, 1848

Brett's
Carrel: Women and ReligionThis section includes bits and snippets of information
relevant to religion and women, both on-site, and recommended off-site
links. Atheism is the primary focus, because, among other things, it represents
the ultimate rejection of the demands of religious teachings and moral
traditions, most of which are based on a quasi-governmental purpose that
includes control of the population. Such control manifests not only in
moral teachings and exortations (supplementing the sovereign laws), but
also in the religion's rituals, concepts about family, and restrictions
on the education and sexual behavior of women (mostly), as well as dictates
of appropriate child-rearing practices. At times religion has become extreme
in the measures used in defense of its own perpetuation, e.g. the Witch
Craze of the Middle Ages, or the religious Jihad or puninitve Sharia laws
of today. At other times religion functions, either as the government or
with the landed government, in more subtle but just as powerful, ways.
Those who wish to control the population (the sovereign, the religious
leaders, or those otherwise in positions or power and privilege) seek to
control women in ways differently from men because women control reproduction,
the greatest societal resource, and -- in the absence of such control over
women -- women would control their offspring. (These lessons are throughout
the Old Testament, e.g. King Solomon.) In a patriarchal culture, not controlling
mothers -- in large part accomplished by and through religion and its moral
teachings (e.g. submission to marriage in husband-headed families) -- could
conceivably result in the overthrow the power structure within a generation
or two. By contrast, war, patriotic rhetoric and military service historically
control the sovereign's male population. Loyalty in that service to the
sovereign -- typically barred to women -- is rewarded for those who survive
with property, ownership power over family members and servants, and often
some measure of citizenship participation. This in turn is how the sovereign
subdues, orders and controls its armies and labor force, the potentially
dangerous and rebellious male population. (In more recent times, psychology,
drugs, pornography -- woman ownership -- and consumerism substitute in
part for traditional patriarchal religion in keeping the labor force subdued
and beholden to the company store.) Also see The
Women's Bible in The Women's History
Library

Woman
Suffrage in the United States; Woman Suffrage TimelineThe timeline in this section includes the little
known -- and usually omitted -- dates when women first LOST their voting
rights in the United States following the Declaration of Independence.
Previously, voting rights were based on land ownership, not sex, and while
most women suffered a chattel-like status as minors or wives under control
of fathers, guardians, and husbands (thus not owning land or exercising
full citizenship rights) some unmarried women heirs and widows without
sons were able to vote and contract because they did not have these "protectors".
See the precedent: Elizabeth I's "I
Have the Heart of a King" speech. Also see other Women's
History Library documents.

Women's
History Library of Source DocumentsIn this section, the documents are arranged in
both chronological order, so that they can be read straight through in
the manner of a history lesson, as well as by author for ease of reference.
Also see the subsection on Woman Suffrage.

Index:
Women of Achievement 366 Days CalendarMore materials similar to those for Women's History
Month (below), but for every day. These materials formerly were housed
at Irene Stuber's undelete.org. The "calendar" is based on the
900+ episodes of Women of Achievement and Herstory that Irene Stuber emailed
to her subscribers 1992-2002. There are tens of thousands of items of biographical
information, trivia, interesting stories, and commentary. Biographies and
"herstory" data presented through 365 daily calendar episodes
plus leap year, and several supplementary items. Use the site search engine
(top of page) to locate information.

CUSTODY EVALUATION ISSUES:
"In the absence of research, MHP's speculations mislead as to the state of their "expertise." There is no apparent requirement that self-styled experts demonstrate a clear research foundation for their ideas or even their own parenting ability prior to making proclamations about what is good or bad for other people's children and families. Moreover, popular trends, un-backed by research, and promoted by political activists, permeate the MHP and lay literature, then the MHP recommendation-making, and finally, court decisions.
"The history of the notion of "parallel parenting" is an example of this.
See, e.g. book by divorced father and joint custody activist, Philip M. Stahl,
Parenting After Divorce: A Guide to Resolving Conflicts and Meeting Your Children's Needs,
Impact Publishers (2000).
"...The second step in this process is what I call parallel parenting. In this style of parenting,
both of you will each learn to parent your child effectively, doing the best job each of you can do
during the time you are with your child. You will continue to disengage from the other parent
so that conflicts are avoided. If you determine that you cannot cooperatively parent because your
level of conflict is moderate or high, disengagement and parallel parenting is the necessary style
of parenting. Parallel parenting gets its name from a similar concept in children's play.
Research psychologists have observed that young children who play together, but do not have the
skills to interact, engage in a process of parallel play..."
"No research indicates that disengaged parenting, in which a child is forced simultaneously
to live in two separate uncommunicating households, is not harmful. No research indicates that this
is a "step" towards anything beneficial, least of all cooperative parenting. Prior to Stahl and
others deciding to tout parallel parenting as a viable custody arrangement for
children post-divorce, it generally was assumed to be harmful, and considered to be an indication
of the failure of joint custody...
"...joint custody is encouraged primarily as a voluntary alternative for
relatively stable, amicable parents behaving in a mature civilized fashion.
As a court-ordered arrangement imposed upon already embattled and embittered parents...
it can only enhance familial chaos." No new research has indicated that these assumptions about
children's wellbeing were incorrect...
"See ...characterizing joint custody arrangements in which parents were not communicating
as an indication that after a period of time, joint custody was not facilitating coparenting
cooperation and not working for most of the families...

Note: this website contains
information, research, scholarship, and arguments pertaining to public
policy and legal issues. Much of it was gathered by attorney and academic
work groups in different jurisdictions. It is not intended to reflect the
specifics of actual laws, substantive or procedural, currently in force
in any jurisdiction. The information is intended for use by scholars, lawyers,
and activists, and is not presented as legal advice.

Alimony
and Child SupportSupport and property issues are deeply interrelated
with other family law and women's employment and equality issues, including
maternity, fathers' rights and child custody, so be sure to review these
other sections for relevant information. Also see
subsection on Mother's Rights, Pregnancy
in FAMILY LAW

Child
Abuse and Domestic ViolenceDomestic violence and abuse issues are integrated
with the issues of child custody, parental alienation theory, father's
rights, and therapeutic jurisprudence (the influx of psychology into the
family court system), etc., so check those sections too. NOTE: The LIZNOTES
index page contains links to recommended off-site locations as well as
the on-site articles.

Child
Custody; joint custody; shared parenting; time-shareChild custody issues are interconnected with issues
of maternity and pregnancy, primary caregiving, parental alienation, child
development (education and attachment issues), father's rights, and other
family law issues, as well as to issues involving forensic psychologists,
guardians ad litem (GALs) and other mental health professionals in the
family court system, so check related sections, including those on psychology
for other relevant articles. NOTE: The LIZNOTES index page contains links
to recommended off-site locations as well as the on-site articles.

Collaborative
Law; Cooperative Law; Voluntary Mediation; etc.This category includes the various forms of ADR
that involve client-controlled negotiated alternate dispute resolution
in the family court system. Also see section on PSYCHOLOGY

Guardians
ad Litem; Parenting Coordinators; Custody Evaluators, etc. This category includes the various forms of so-called
ADR (alternate dispute resolution) practitioners, such as GALs, parenting
coordinators, parenting evaluators, forensic psychologists, recommending
mediators, special masters, court-ordered therapists, other court-appointed
mental health professionals, supervised visitation centers, and other profiteers
of "therapeutic jurisprudence", whose methods involve -- in non-criminal
cases -- intrusion and coercion under the threat of court sanctions, and
actual or de facto extra-judicial decision-making. This website
heavily criticizes all of these practices, which have multiple things
wrong with them, not the least of which is denigration of due process,
and the diminution of a publicly observable, regulated, and appealable
"rule by law" by substituting the caprice of men and women. These
practices have been promoted as "cures" for ailings of the court
system and the litigants in it by self-serving persons who apparently are
ignorant, or else just do not care about the harms they cause to children
and their parents because they make money from the ideas they promote,
churning profit in proceedings that fly in the face of the foundations
of our justice system. The bulk of these materials are listed in the section
on PSYCHOLOGY. Also see the sections on the specific
substantive issues, such as child development or parental alienation.

Mother's
Issues: Maternity, Paternity and Pregnancy IssuesPregnancy and maternity/maternity issues are integrated
with the issues of child custody, property and support issues rights, parental
alienation defense theory used to counter allegations of abuse and otherwise
discredit women's testimony and childcare histories, child development
(education and attachment issues), father's rights, and other family law
issues, so check related sections for other relevant articles. NOTE: The
LIZNOTES index page contains links to recommended off-site locations as
well as the on-site articles. Also see subsection
on Attachment and Bonding in CHILD DEVELOPMENT,
and Alimony in FAMILY LAW. For history of mothers'
rights, see THE
WOMEN'S LIBRARY.

Parental
Alienation Syndrome; hostile-aggressive parenting; enmeshmentNOTE: The LIZNOTES index page contains links to
recommended off-site locations as well as the on-site articles. Also see
Section on PSYCHOLOGY, because the entertaining
of alienation theory (by whatever name **) has become integral to the plying
of the therapeutic jurisprudence trades in the family courts. It is a primary
creator of the relationship engineering industries, and spawns work for
"experts" opining pro and con, as well as GALs, supervised visitation
centers, court-ordered therapists, custody evaluators, parenting coordinators,
and all of their respective lawyers. [** hostile-aggressive parenting,
enmeshment, intrusive parenting, intractable hostilities, high conflict,
etc.]

Psychology in the Family
Court; Forensic; Therapeutic JurisprudenceSee comments under Guardians
ad Litem, and then go to section onPSYCHOLOGY.
Also see the sections on the specific substantive issues, such as child
development or parental alienation.

Relocation;
Post-divorce Move-awaysPost-divorce relocation issues are interconnected
with issues of maternity and pregnancy, primary caregiving, economics,
parental alienation, child development (education and attachment issues),
father's rights, and other family law issues, as well as to issues involving
forensic psychologists, guardians ad litem (GALs) and other mental health
professionals in the family court system, so check related sections, including
those on psychology for other relevant articles. NOTE: The LIZNOTES index
page contains links to recommended off-site locations as well as the on-site
articles.

Research
"Myths and Facts" pagesThese pages, and the pages on custody evaluation
and the joint custody, contain literally thousands of research citations.
The sociological and psychological research on families and child well-being
impacts public policy and the issues of child custody in family law. The
research frequently is misrepresented, and mis-cited by mental health professionals,
lawyers, forensic psychologists and others, as well as interest groups
lobbying for laws. The "facts" on the research myths and facts
pages refer to the "fact" of the actual research findings. Often
what is cited instead is the "spin" or speculation in researchers'
writeups. These pages are presented as a commentary on the flimsy rationales
(of record) given for much of current public policy. Also review the other
sections pertaining to the issues impacted by the research, such as child
custody, parental alienation theory, and other family law issues, as well
as the section on therapeutic jurisprudence, which in the family courts
is economic opportunism (not science) under the pretext that engineering
family affectional relationships is within the ability of mental health
"science" to accomplish (this is misrepresentation), and moreover,
that it is an appropriate goal of the government and court system using
the specious rationale that these interventions are necessary or helpful
for children's wellbeing (while ignoring the many iatrogenic effects on
both families and the over-burdened courts).Also
see subsection on Child Custody in FAMILY LAW

Critique
of Kelly and Lamb Infant Overnight "research" literature
by lizCITATIONS TO RESEARCHThis paper is used
as a teaching illustration of how to do critical reading, and of how the
research is distorted and misrepresented in the sociology and psychology
literature. It is a line-by-line analysis of propaganda techniques, logic
errors, and outright fraud. The Lamb and Kelly article is presented in
its entirety, interlineated with discussion and commentary, as well as
annotations. The widely-cited paper, Using Child Development Research
to Make Appropriate Custody and Access Decisions for Young Children (2000),
is an example of pseudo-science posing as objective scholarship by "researchers"
or "scientists".But it's a political position paper advocating
(without sound basis for doing so), for joint custody for babies and very
young children.

These are transcripts from
"A Fatherless Minute" series sponsored by The Liz Library for
The Justice Hour radio show on WPBR 1340 AM. The term "fatherless"
("fatherlessness") is used in this series as it is in current
research and policy rhetoric by the U.S. federal government, DHHS and the
National Fatherhood Initiative, most U.S. states in connection with child
custody law and policy, and various family values and fatherhood interest
policy and lobbying groups. (For the research, see the subsections Research
Myths and Facts and Child Custody, as
well as the section on FAMILY LAW generally.)

Forensic Psychology;
Guardians ad Litem; Therapeutic JurisprudenceThe sociological and psychological research on
families and child well-being impacts public policy and the issues of child
custody in family law. The research frequently is misrepresented, and mis-cited
by mental health professionals, lawyers, forensic psychologists and others,
as well as interest groups lobbying for laws. Also review the sections
pertaining to the issues impacted by the "therapeutic jurisprudence",
such as child custody, parental alienation theory, research pertaining
to child development, the subsection for research Myths
and Facts in FAMILY LAW, and other family law issues.
Also see the subsection on Child Custody in
FAMILY LAW.The Therapeutic Jurisprudence index page
contains links to recommended off-site locations as well as the on-site
articles

Index:
Therapeutic JurisprudenceThis section of the website contains current public
material from on-going research being conducted around the United States
and in Canada by various scholars and organizations who are sharing findings,
as well as links to articles and off-site locations on the issue of the
harmful use of psychology and psychological theories in the family court
systems. Therapeutic jurisprudence in the family courts, i.e. a "mental
health approach to the law" substitutes the opinions of mental health
practitioners for traditional evidence and decision-making procedures.
Because these persons actually do not have any kind of "expertise"
to opine this way, what originally was thought to be a helpful idea (in
this medicalized and psychologized world) has become merely economic opportunism,
harming not only the litigants and children in the system as well as the
court system itself, but also perverting substantive and procedural law.
It is not science, but compensated yenta-ism that has permeated the courts
under the pretexts that engineering family affectional relationships is
within the ability of mental health "science" practitioners to
accomplish, and that this is an appropriate goal of the government, court
system, and state police power because children "need" something
it has to offer. See additional comments on this index page here.
If you are interested in activism, helping with research in your state,
or contributing articles or materials on "therapeutic jurisprudence"
contact cce-research@argate.net